As religious faith has declined, ideological intensity has risen • Hacker News Board

Re: As religious faith has declined, ideological intensity has risen

#771

Post by mensetmanusman » Mon, Jun 14, 2021, 12:38 PM UTC

Haiatu wrote: post #762

mensetmanusman wrote: post #662

Earlier quoted context omitted.

“ They're just a free-standing, self-consistent logical structure that can't be justified in any way except by claiming that it justifies itself. It's not that Aquinas didn't use reasoning; as noted above, he did--lots of it.” Interestingly, this also describes all of math, logic, and philosophy. One of the more interesting axioms or assertions is whether there exists free will, which is, by any interesting definitio…

Thats not true for math / science. Math is based on fundamental global laws which exist and can be checked from everyone and they can come up all with the same math. We could isolate a baby and it could create the same math while it couldn't create the same religion.

Math is based on human chosen axioms. Actually, there are a lot of different sub fields of math that have different subsets of axioms to solve different types of problems. The axioms can never be proven though, they are just grounding.

Isolating a human is analogous to removing oxygen. Few would argue that someone brain dead could create anything.

Re: As religious faith has declined, ideological intensity has risen

#772

Post by stevofolife » Mon, Jun 14, 2021, 2:11 PM UTC

Haiatu wrote: post #762

mensetmanusman wrote: post #662

Earlier quoted context omitted.

“ They're just a free-standing, self-consistent logical structure that can't be justified in any way except by claiming that it justifies itself. It's not that Aquinas didn't use reasoning; as noted above, he did--lots of it.” Interestingly, this also describes all of math, logic, and philosophy. One of the more interesting axioms or assertions is whether there exists free will, which is, by any interesting definitio…

Thats not true for math / science. Math is based on fundamental global laws which exist and can be checked from everyone and they can come up all with the same math. We could isolate a baby and it could create the same math while it couldn't create the same religion.

That's a very shallow statement.

An isolated baby could derive simple math but also similarly deduce there is a greater entity out there.

Re: As religious faith has declined, ideological intensity has risen

#773

Post by stevofolife » Mon, Jun 14, 2021, 2:15 PM UTC

mssundaram wrote: post #392

whatshisface wrote: post #149

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Few people understand that most religions e.g. Judaism and Christianity have an apologetic discipline – a deliberate arm open to debate. Open to talking about it, sure, but the crucial element that separates apologetics from real debate is that one side is forbidden from changing their mind. In religion there is a rule overshadowing the exchange of ideas that says, "no matter how convinced you are, or how weak your…

I am biased as a Hindu but I find that Hinduism stands apart here as a religion in that the emphasis is on one's own and the truths discovered therefrom rather than blindly accepting beliefs.

If that's case, I can hardly take Hinduism as a religion. If the burden is on an individual to discover and accept his/her own truths rather than blindly accepting beliefs, then isn't this the same as any secular belief system? Secular people also emphasize on one's own and discover truths themselves to make up of their own belief system.

Re: As religious faith has declined, ideological intensity has risen

#774

Post by lhorie » Mon, Jun 14, 2021, 3:06 PM UTC

Haiatu wrote: post #765

lhorie wrote: post #686

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Religious types often say the same of the non-religious. Here's other analogies to illustrate the reductio ad absurdum: plenty of people prove school not to be working (by getting failing grades, passing by cheating, etc), plenty of people prove entrepreneurship not to be working (by going bankrupt), etc. All this line of observation shows us is that variability exists everywhere. Something to keep in mind is that re…

Thats not my point i was making. The parent mentioned specifically religious believes as a tool for good child upbringing. My counter argument shows, that religious upbringing doesn't necessarily mean a good moral & ethics.

> The parent mentioned specifically religious believes as a tool for good child upbringing.

No, I merely pointed out that religious upbringing is explicit about some topics in ways that non-religious one usually aren't.

Your counter argument can be flipped around into "religious upbringing doesn't necessarily mean bad morals & ethics", so in effect it's not really saying anything meaningful.

Re: As religious faith has declined, ideological intensity has risen

#775

Post by ttfkam » Mon, Jun 14, 2021, 3:12 PM UTC

stevofolife wrote: post #772

Haiatu wrote: post #762

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Thats not true for math / science. Math is based on fundamental global laws which exist and can be checked from everyone and they can come up all with the same math. We could isolate a baby and it could create the same math while it couldn't create the same religion.

That's a very shallow statement. An isolated baby could derive simple math but also similarly deduce there is a greater entity out there.

Yes, but the stories and abilities regarding that greater entity will be as varied and inconsistent as those found all over the world. And most importantly will not be the same as any of them. How many wildly different stories are there regarding the creation of the world?

Whereas the axioms of math will be substantially similar to the point that any modern mathematician would recognize it. We see this on ancient tablets where folks were calculating the square root of 2. Or any of the cultures all around the world that had no significant contact with one another that deal with pi. Sure we'll see base-12 number systems as with the Babylonians or base-20 as with the Maya, but the underlying principles and lessons are largely IDENTICAL.

The worlds of math and the metaphysical could not be more different in that regard. Rather than being a very shallow statement, it is one of the most all-encompassing and profound in all of human history. It gave rise to the principles of the scientific method: humans are biased, so multiple people performing the same steps should come to the same results and predictions made based on those results should yield their own repeatable consistent results.

Re: As religious faith has declined, ideological intensity has risen

#776

Post by ttfkam » Mon, Jun 14, 2021, 3:14 PM UTC

mensetmanusman wrote: post #703

guntars wrote: post #676

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Interestingly, this also describes all of math, logic, and philosophy. Which is totally fine, as long as people accept that God exists the same way math exists.

Yes, and ancient Christians asserted that God is love. Many do accept that love exists in the same way math exists.

Omnipotent. Omniscient. Omnibenevolent.

Like the CAP theorem, you can only have two without substantial compromise.

Re: As religious faith has declined, ideological intensity has risen

#777

Post by ttfkam » Mon, Jun 14, 2021, 3:30 PM UTC

watwut wrote: post #562

_teyd wrote: post #539

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This idea that science and technology is just another random religion is so frustrating, but I encounter it online way more often than I would expect. I don’t need to personally review and understand the details of why electricity and the internet work, because I am literally typing this message on an electronic device and sending it via the internet. No faith needed, and anyway.. I can go build a simple computer and…

The argument is not that the science is same as religion. The argument is that individuals dont rationally objectively verify or figure out every experiment and scientific claim. I stead, we all rely on trust to institutions and processes to tell us how it is. Which is how it is. Most people dont even know how science actually work beyond elementary school level of simplification. And even if you actually do science…

Which is why the blanket "lying media" and "fake news" rhetoric is so dangerous. It removes that trust—often unjustifiably and usually in total—without specifying what other institutions or processes can be trusted instead for reliable information besides a known orange-tinted salesman with an affection for Mein Kampf.

GANs and other deep fakes are going to be weaponized and absolutely obliterate the foundations of this country if that trust in legitimate journalism cannot be adequately restored in time. All journalism is biased, but we're not talking about bias; we're talking about up is down.

Very soon literally anyone can be shown saying anything… to anyone else… anywhere… wearing anything (or nothing)… with resources akin to a typical gaming computer. As a nation, we are woefully unprepared for that day, and we will pay dearly for that lack of preparation.

Re: As religious faith has declined, ideological intensity has risen

#778

Post by me_me_me » Mon, Jun 14, 2021, 3:46 PM UTC

GreekPete wrote: post #643

Barrin92 wrote: post #568

I think the real issue is laid out at the end >"If matters of good and evil are not to be resolved by an omniscient God in the future, then Americans will judge and render punishment now. We are a nation of believers. If only Americans could begin believing in politics less fervently, realizing instead that life is elsewhere. But this would come at a cost—because to believe in politics also means believing we can, an…

I don't know if you saw it, but Sam Harris, Jordan Peterson and Douglas Murray had a debate about this topic a few years ago: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aALsFhZKg-Q TLDW: we don't know if Peterson is religious or not but he thinks that Christianity must stay. Harris (obviously) is an atheist and thinks religions must go. Now, Douglas is interesting. He's an atheist but thinks that Christianity must stay because…

> Christianity must stay because much-much worse ideologies would take its place

That is one terrifying statement. And I think I changed my mind about christianity being gone would make for a better world.

if qanon is anything but a sample taste of possible future I sure hope christianity stays.

Re: As religious faith has declined, ideological intensity has risen

#779

Post by lotsofpulp » Mon, Jun 14, 2021, 4:12 PM UTC

friedman23 wrote: post #759

lotsofpulp wrote: post #404

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It is funny seeing this: > These same people would've been in the mob in salem executing so called witches a couple hundred years ago and would have been just as certain in their beliefs then. after this: > I don't know you and can't speak for you.

Explain how this is funny at all?

Not being able to speak for someone implies you do not know their thoughts or motivations.

So in the second sentence, you acknowledge that you do not know the thoughts or motivations of the person you are responding to, but the preceding sentence implies that you do know the thoughts and motivations of some other people, and what they would or would not have done a couple hundred years ago.

I.e. a very strong claim about one group of people you do not know, followed by an acknowledgement that said strong claim cannot be made for another group of people you do not know.

Re: As religious faith has declined, ideological intensity has risen

#780

Post by pdonis » Mon, Jun 14, 2021, 5:10 PM UTC

pyuser583 wrote: post #741

GreekPete wrote: post #600

Earlier quoted context omitted.

For example, people used to believe the Book of Genesis literally, and now (I believe) most denominations take it allegorically. I wonder how many similar stories like that will we have in the future. For me, it always felt like the interpretation of the Holy Books are changing through time as we understand science more and more. And it feels ironic to me.

Literal interpretation of Genesis is a fairly recent phenomenon. Fundamentalism is a modern religion.

> Literal interpretation of Genesis is a fairly recent phenomenon.

Um, no, it isn't. It's how Genesis was interpreted by most people of the Jewish and Christian religions throughout most of the time since it was written. What is a fairly recent phenomenon is people of those religions not interpreting Genesis (and the Bible in general) literally.